Missed assignments week 1

1 - What is Aristotle’s main innovation/ contribution to the classification of organisms? That is, what did he do differently than any predecessors? Why does Aristotle’s or Pliny’s natural histories include things like “wonder people” and dragons? What is the explanation for their having been recognized equally with various kinds of fish, deer, or other well-known animals?

Aristotle was the first to begin creating a system by which animas were classified beyond obvious viewing of reptile/fish/bird/etc, based on their physiology. He, of course, did not have the correct means to measure these distinctions, instead making assertions on blood/bloodless, how they bear offspring, and by number of limbs. This division of classification, he opened up to future generations by stating his position as the first steps, encouraging corrections upon which to build a more modern model such as Linnaeus’s Doman, kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, species. 

The reason for his inclusion of mythological beasts was because of the inability to acquire animals that were seen on conquests into Africa and Asia. He received information through word-of-mouth, documenting the observations of others as fact. These second-hand observations often lead to drastic exaggerations and misinformation. Those specimens he was able to acquire, such as elephant skulls, were misinterpreted as large, one-eyed humans.

2 - Why was there a new urgency to classify the diversity of life in the 1700’s (Linnaeus’ time) than there was for ancient Greeks like Aristotle and Pliny? What fundamentally had changed in Europe by the time Linnaeus was observing the variety of living things. Why was Linnaeus called the “Little Oracle”?

With the rise in exploration and trade came with it the discovery of new species of animals and plants. Moreover, these animals could be transported and collected for observation and study. At the time, a largely Eurocentric system of classification was in place, but as these discoveries were made, the system made less and less sense when trying to group these foreign species. Consequently, a new system needed to be developed to account for these changes. 

Linneus was a particularly adept zoologist in creating links between species and ordering them into a hierarchy of groupings. The true genius of his system was creating nested groups that became more and more specialized.

3 - Which definitions of “natural history” from the Natural Histories Project were most interesting to you and why? How do any of them speak to you personally? Relate interstingly to each other? Relate to zoos and the notions of natural history that came up in this week’s readings?

I rather liked Sarah Rabkin’s story and definition of “natural history” because it illustrated what is so profoundly dynamic about the natural world. Her scenario of the mites utilizing humming bird’s nostrils to migrate hundreds of miles south, when one season of flowers on which they depend, ends. It goes to show that there are sinuous interlinking relationships between animals and plants that pass seemingly unnoticed, but with the right insight one can realize the continuities as well as realize that they themselves, too are part of this interconnection, even on levels unnoticeable. This relates to Gary Paul Nabhan’s ideas of natural historians as pack rats, learning about each of these creatures on the intimate scale in hopes of fitting them like puzzle pieces into the whole system at large.

4 – Pick out one quote from Annie Dillard’s essay on Seeing that stood out to you and discuss it further. What is significant about it and why? If it connects to any of the other readings or the Observation 1 exercise to you, mention how.

“A photography professor at the University of Florida just happened to see a bird die in midflight; it jerked, died, dropped, and smashed on the ground. I squint at the wind because I read Stewart Edward White: ‘I have always maintained that if you looked closely enough you could see the wind- the dim, hardly-made-out, fine debris fleeing high in the air.’ White was an excellent observer, and devoted an entire chapter of The Mountains to the subject of seeing deer. ‘As soon as you can forget the naturally obvious and construct an artificial obvious, then you too will see deer.’”

I am particularly interested in this notion of the artificially obvious vs. the naturally obvious and how this is a challenge for Annie Dillard. The artificial obvious comes from experience in seeing, a familiarity with the conceptual structures that build the phenomena. Dillard goes further to explain a scenario in which she is told to look for green to find a frog, but finds it is the color of bark.  To look for something with preprogrammed notions of invisibility, one can realize the subtlety by “not seeing” in order to discern the thing that at face value, blends in with the environment. The readily apparent notion would be to search for a green frog, but a trained mind knows to seek a frog that hides in a particular area, blends with a certain leaf, moves in a certain way, etc… By knowing the artificially constructed “obvious” concept, one will see frogs everywhere, and every bark colored patch becomes a place of intrigue

Observation

I was walking beneath a train track and noticed this lightly colored pigeon that almost blended in with the sidewalk. Were the city a “predatory” environment, this camoflage might benefit it. Sadly, hunters are not the only danger, but panes of glass and windows prove to be just as hazerdous. These deaths are quite common in the urban environment with skyscrapers and highrises constructed largely of transparent/ mirrored glass. Already there is at work a number of factors that will make this discovey a fleeting moment. Ants and parasites have begin to crawl behind the corners of the eyes and in the gaps in feathers. A sanitation worker slowly makes its way up the block. Perhaps someone might collect this specemin and donate it to the field museum.

I was particularly drawn to this one because it reminded me of a suicide case from 1940’s of Evelyn McHale, who jumped from he Empire State Building. Though there was no volition involved in the motive for deah for this bird, it illustrates a shared victimhood of the urban architecture and of the tragic misfortune of happenstance. It also seems to be a rather well adapted animal, despite its obvious post-mortum condition, to the urban environment